"Katz: Yes. The FCC makes the papers sound one-sided, when they are not. One paper in the American Economic Review in 1987 showed that discriminatory pricing (by an upstream monopolist selling to downstream competitors) would often tend to be against large successful incumbents—in this case, against established edge providers—not struggling new entrants, which is the opposite of the pro-net neutrality narrative. Moreover, the Commission ignored another paper of mine in Information and Economic Policy in 2007 that concluded net neutrality would harm applications that did not require high speeds and was more likely to harm welfare than improve it.
Singer: What could have caused this? Was there an institutional problem at the FCC? I’m certain the FCC employs top-flight economists. How can something like that happen at a federal agency?
Connolly: The institutional nature and especially culture at the FCC has for many years been driven by politics over expertise. The structure is currently such that FCC economists do not even have to been spoken with before commissioners determine their positions."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2017/07/12/bringing-economics-back-into-the-net-neutrality-debate/#6dbd560a69da
Singer: What could have caused this? Was there an institutional problem at the FCC? I’m certain the FCC employs top-flight economists. How can something like that happen at a federal agency?
Connolly: The institutional nature and especially culture at the FCC has for many years been driven by politics over expertise. The structure is currently such that FCC economists do not even have to been spoken with before commissioners determine their positions."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2017/07/12/bringing-economics-back-into-the-net-neutrality-debate/#6dbd560a69da